`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 2 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`Notice of Service of Process
`
`Primary Contact:
`
`Ms. Lynn Radliff
`Amazon.Com, Inc.
`440 Terry Ave N
`Seattle, WA 98109-5210
`
`null / ALL
`Transmittal Number: 20581407
`Date Processed: 10/23/2019
`
`Electronic copy provided to:
`
` Rochelle Lewis
` Scotty Bauder
` Rebecca Hartley
` Kimberly Thomas
` Lizette Fernandez
` Theresa Nixon
` Karen Curtis
` Lynn Foley-Jefferson
` Joell Parks
` Gianmarco Vairo
` Christine Schram
` Stephen Swisher
` Sara Rawson
` Michelle King
` Annamaria Taskai
` Maria Catana
` Eugide Matondo
` Jesse Jensen
`
`Entity:
`
`Entity Served:
`
`Title of Action:
`
`Document(s) Type:
`
`Nature of Action:
`
`Court/Agency:
`
`Case/Reference No:
`
`Jurisdiction Served:
`
`Date Served on CSC:
`
`Answer or Appearance Due:
`
`Originally Served On:
`
`How Served:
`
`Sender Information:
`
`Amazon Web Services, Inc.
`Entity ID Number 2684737
`Amazon Web Services, Inc., A Delaware Corporation
`Asia Hryniewicki vs. Amazon Web Services, Inc.
`Summons/Complaint
`Class Action
`Lake County Circuit Court, IL
`19CH00001155
`Delaware
`10/22/2019
`30 Days
`CSC
`Personal Service
`Jad Sheikali
`312-893-7002
`
`Information contained on this transmittal form is for record keeping, notification and forwarding the attached document(s). It does not
`constitute a legal opinion. The recipient is responsible for interpreting the documents and taking appropriate action.
`
`To avoid potential delay, please do not send your response to CSC
`251 Little Falls Drive, Wilmington, Delaware 19808-1674 (888) 690-2882 | sop@cscglobal.com
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`.
`
`FILED
`10/8I2019 2:30 PM
`ERIN CARTWRIGHT WEINSTEIN
`IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
`Clerk Of the Circu“ (ion-rt
`NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
`Lake County, I" ”10's
`LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS
`
`No.
`
`19CH00001155
`
`Hon.
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`)
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`) ) ) )
`
`ASIA HRYNIEWICKI, individually and
`on behalf of similarly situated individuals,
`
`Plaintififi
`
`v.
`
`AMAZON WEB SERVICES,
`Delaware corporation.
`
`INC,
`
`a
`
`Defizndan I.
`___________~_
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
`-———~—.__________—_
`
`Plaintiff Asia Hryniewicki (“Plaintiff”),
`
`individually and on behalf of other similarly
`
`situated individuals, brings thisClass Action Complaint against Defendant Amazon Web Services,
`
`Inc. (“Defendant”) for its violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS
`
`14/1, et seq. (“BIPA”). Plaintiff alleges as follows based on personal knowledge as to her own acts
`
`and experiences, and as to all other matters, upon information and belief, including an investigation
`
`conducted by her attorneys.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`BlPA defines a “biometric identifier” as any personal feature that is unique to an
`
`individual, including fingerprints and hand geometry. “Biometric information” is any information
`
`based on a biometric identifier, regardless of how it is converted or stored. 740 ILCS 14/10.
`
`Collectively, biometric identifiers and biometric information are knowu as “biometrics.”
`
`2_
`
`Defendant is a leading cloud provider in the United States, offering its customers
`
`the ability to store their data, access their data remotely, and create back—up copies of their data.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`3.
`
`Defendant stores a myriad of types of data on behalf of a wide range of customers
`
`spanning virtually every industry sector.
`
`4.
`
`Notably, Defendant also offers cloud storage services for businesses that handle
`
`biometric identifiers and biometric information. For example, some of Defendant’s customers are
`
`commercial businesses that require their employees to provide their biometrics, e.g. fingerprints,
`
`to check in and out of their shifts at work. In such a scenario, Defendant stores data and information
`
`that is generated as a result of the capture, collection, and processing of biometric identifiers. This
`
`information is considered “biometric information” subject to regulation under BIPA.
`
`5.
`
`Indeed, BIPA not only regulates the conduct of entities that capture and collect
`
`biometric identifiers, such as many of Defendant’s commercial customers, but also of entities that
`
`store data and information derived from those biometric identifiers, like Defendant.
`
`6.
`
`BIPA provides, inter alia, that private entities, such as Defendant, may not store an
`
`individual’s biometric identifiers, such as fingerprints and hand scans, or any biometric
`
`information, including any data regardless of the manner from which it was converted, or is
`
`converted or stored, unless they first:
`
`a.
`
`inform that perSOn in writing that biometric identifiers or biometric information will
`
`be stored;
`
`b.
`
`inform that person in writing of the specific purpose and the length of term for which
`
`such biometric identifiers or biometric information is being stored; and
`
`c.
`
`receive a written release from the person for the storage of their biometric identifiers
`
`or biometric information.
`
`740 ILCS 14/15(b)(l)-{3).
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`7.
`
`BIPA also requires private entities in possession of biometric information to
`
`develop a publicly available written policy outlining their biometric data storage and destruction
`
`policies. 750 ILCS 14/15(a).
`
`8.
`
`Despite obtaining, storing, and possessing biometric information of thousands of
`
`Illinois residents, including Plaintiff's biometrics, on behalf of scores of its customers, Defendant
`
`failed to comply with BIPA.
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action for statutory damages and other remedies as a result 'of
`
`Defendant‘s conduct in violating her biometric privacy rights under BIPA.
`
`10.
`
`Compliance with BIPA is straightforward and minimally burdensome. For
`
`example, the necessary disclosures may be accomplished through a single sheet ofpaper or through
`
`a prominently featured notice affixed to a biometric-enabled device.
`
`11.
`
`BIPA‘S requirements bestow a right to privacy in biometrics and a right to make an
`
`informed decision when electing whether to provide or withhold biometrics.
`
`12.
`
`The deprivation of the statutory rights conferred by BIPA constitutes the actual
`
`injuries the Illinois Legislature sought to prevent.
`
`13.
`
`On behalf of herself and the proposed Class and Subclass defined below, Plaintiff
`
`seeks an injunction requiring Defendant to comply with BIPA, as well as an award of statutory
`
`damages to the Class members and monetary damages to be determined at trial, together with costs
`
`and reasonable attorneys’ fees.
`
`PARTIES
`
`14.
`
`Defendant Amazon Web Services, Inc, is a Delaware corporation that couducts,
`
`and is licensed by the lllinois Secretary of State to conduct, business throughout Illinois, including
`
`in Lake County, Illinois.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`[5.
`
`At all relevant times, Plaintiff has been a resident of Lake County, Illinois and a
`
`citizen of the state of Illinois.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`16.
`
`This Court may assert personal jurisdiction over Defendant pursuant to 735 ILCS
`
`512-209 in accordance with the Illinois Constitution and the Constitution of the United States,
`
`because Defendant is doing business within this state and because Plaintiff’s claims arise out of
`
`Defendant’s unlawful in-state actions.
`
`1?.
`
`Venue is proper in Lake County, Illinois pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-101, because
`
`Defendant is doing business in Lake County, Illinois, and thus resides there under § 2—102, and
`
`because the transaction out of which this cause of action arises occurred in Lake County, Illinois.
`
`FACTS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF
`
`18.
`
`In order to store the same on its cloud servers on behalf of its commercial
`
`customers, Defendant obtained and possessed data and information, and/or portions of data and
`
`information, that were derived from Plaintiff‘s biometric identifiers, i.e. Defendant obtained and
`
`stored Plaintiff's biometric information. Such information would not exist absent the capture and
`
`collection of Plaintiff‘s biometric identifiers by Defendant’s commercial customers and
`
`Defendant’s subsequent possession and storage of the same.
`
`19.
`
`After its commercial customers capture and collect the biometric identifiers of
`
`individuals such as Plaintiff, Defendant stores biometric information that is derived from such
`
`biometric identifiers in a multitude of digitally convertedformats.
`
`20,
`
`On information and belief, Defendant has custody and control of the biometric
`
`information that it obtains and stores on its cloud servers. Defendant converts this information into
`
`usable formats and mediums for its customers.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`21.
`
`Despite possessing Plaintiff’s biometric information, Defendant has failed to
`
`implement a publicly available biometric data retention and destruction policy as required by
`
`Section 15(a) of BIPA.
`
`22.
`
`Further, despite obtaining and subsequently storing Plaintiffs biometric
`
`information, Defendant failed to inform Plaintiff of the length of time and purpose for which it
`
`was storing her biometrics, nor did Defendant obtain Plaintiff's informed written consent prior to
`
`obtaining and storing her biometrics, all in violation of Section 15(b) of BIPA.
`
`23.
`
`By failing to comply with BIPA, Defendant has violated Plaintiff’ s substantive state
`
`rights to biometric privacy.
`
`CLASS ALLEGATIONS
`
`24.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and a class of similarly situated
`
`individuals pursuant to 735 ILCS § 5/2—801. Plaintiff seeks to represent a Class and Subclass
`
`(unless otherwise noted, “Class”) defined as follows:
`
`Class: All residents of the state of Illinois whose biometric identifiers or biometric
`information was stored by Defendant on behalf of a third-party at any time within the
`applicable limitations period.
`
`25.
`
`Excluded from the Class are any members of the judiciary assigned to preside over
`
`this matter; any officer or director of Defendant; and any immediate family member of such officer
`
`or director.
`
`26.
`
`There are at least thousands, if not hundreds ofthousands, of members of the Class,
`
`making the members of the Class so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.
`
`Although the exact number ofmembers of the Class is currently unknown to Plaintiff, the members
`
`can be easily identified through Defendant’s records.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`27.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the Class she seeks to represent,
`
`because the bases of Defendant’s liability to Plaintiff and the Class is substantially the same, and
`
`because Defendant’s conduct has resulted in similar injuries to Plaintiff and to the Class.
`
`28.
`
`There are many questions of law and fact common to the claims of Plaintiff and the
`
`Class, and those questions predominate over any questions that may affect individual members of
`
`the Class. Common questions for the Class include, but are not limited to, the following:
`
`a. Whether Defendant stores data or information that is derived or based on biometric
`
`identifiers;
`
`b. Whether Defendant made available to the public a written policy that establishes a
`
`retention schedule and guidelines for destroying biometric identifiers or biometric
`
`information;
`
`c. Whether Defendant’s conduct violates BIPA;
`
`d. Whether Defendant’s BIPA violations are willful or reckless; and
`
`6. Whether Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to damages and injunctive relief.
`
`29.
`
`Absent a class action, most members of the Class would find the cost of litigating
`
`their claims to be prohibitively expensive and would thus have no effective remedy. The class
`
`treatment of common questions of law and fact is superior to multiple individual actions or
`
`piecemeal litigation in that it conserves the resources of the courts and the litigants and promotes
`
`consistency and efficiency of adjudication.
`
`30.
`
`Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the other
`
`members of the Class she seeks to represent. Plaintiff has retained counsel with substantial
`
`experience in prosecuting cemplex litigation and class actions. Plaintiff and her counsel are
`
`committed to vigorously prosecuting this action on behalf of the other members of the Class and
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`have the financial resources to do so. Neither Plaintiff nor her counsel has any interest adverse to
`
`those of the other members of the Class.
`
`3].
`
`Defendant has acted and failed to act on grounds generally applicable to the
`
`Plaintiff and the other members of the Class, requiring the Court’s imposition of uniform relief to
`
`ensure compatible standards of conduct toward the members of the Class and making injunctive
`
`or corresponding declaratory relief appropriate for the Class as a whole.
`
`COUNT I
`Violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14/15(a)
`(On behalf of Plaintiff and the Class and against Defendant)
`
`32.
`
`Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.
`
`33.
`
`Defendant is a private entity under BIPA. 740 ILCS 14/10.
`
`34.
`
`Section 15(a) of BIPA provides that private entities in possession of biometric
`
`information must develop a publicly available biometric data retention and destruction policy.
`
`35.
`
`As discussed herein, Defendant obtains and stores biometric information on behalf
`
`of its customers, and Defendant obtained and- stored Plaintiff’ s biometric information. Thus,
`
`Defendant necessarily, even if temporarily, possessed Plaintiff s biometric information in order to
`
`store the same and make the same available for remote and third-party access to its customers.
`
`36.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant maintains custody and coutrol of the
`
`biometric information it possesses on its servers.
`
`37.
`
`Despite obtaining Plaintiff’s biometric information and in violation ofSection l5(a)
`
`of BIPA, Defendant failed to develop and make publicly available a biometric data retention and
`
`destruction policy.
`
`38.
`
`Thus, Defendant violated Section 15(a) of BIPA and, in doing so, has violated
`
`Plaintiff‘s substantive state rights to biometric privacy
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`39.
`
`BIPA provides for statutory damages of $5,000 for each willful and/or reckless
`
`violation of BIPA and, alternatively, damages of $1,000 for each negligent violation of BIPA. 740
`
`chs 14/20(1)-(2).
`
`40.
`
`Defendant’s violations of Section 15(3) of BIPA, as set forth herein, were knowing
`
`and willful, or were at least in reckless disregard of the statutory requirements. Alternatively,
`
`Defendant negligently failed to comply with Section 15(a) BIPA.
`
`41.
`
`Accordingly, with respect to Count 1, Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and the
`
`proposed Class, prays for the relief set forth below, including statutory damages for each of
`
`Defendant’s violations of Section 15(3) of BIPA.
`
`Violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14/1503)
`(On behalf of Plaintiff and the Class and against Defendant)
`
`COUNT II
`
`42.
`
`Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fillly set forth herein.
`
`43.
`
`Defendant is a private entity under BIPA. 740 ILCS 14/10.
`
`44.
`
`Section 15(b) of BIPA provides that private entities may not store an individual’s
`
`biometric information unless they first inform the individual of the purpose and length of time for
`
`which such biometric information is being stored and obtain such individual’s written consent.
`
`45.
`
`As discussed herein, Defendant obtains and stores biometric information on behalf
`
`of its customers, and Defendant obtained Plaintiff’s biometric information, in order to store the
`
`same and make the same available for remote and third—party access.
`
`46.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant maintains custody and control of the
`
`biometric information it stores on its servers.
`
`47.
`
`Despite storing Plaintiff’s biometric information and in violation of Section 15(b)
`
`of BIPA, Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff with any notice concerning the purpose for Which
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`her biometric information was being stored by Defendant, the length of time for which Defendant
`
`planned to store her biometric information, or when Defendant planned to delete her biometric
`
`information, nor did Defendant obtained Plaintiff's written consent before storing her biometric
`
`information.
`
`48.
`
`Thus, Defendant violated Section 15(b) of BIPA and, in doing so, has violated
`
`Plaintiff‘s substantive state rights to biometric privacy.
`
`49.
`
`BIPA provides for statutory damages of $5,000 for each willful and/or reckless
`
`violation of BIPA and, alternatively, damages of $1,000 for each negligent violation of BIPA. 740
`
`ILCS 14/20(1)-(2).
`
`50.
`
`Defendant‘s violations of Section 15(b) of BIPA, as set forth herein, were knowing
`
`and willful, or were at least in reckless disregard of the statutory requirements. Alternatively,
`
`Defendant negligently failed to comply with Section 15(b) BIPA.
`
`51.
`
`Accordingly, with respect to Count 11, Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and the
`
`proposed Class, prays for the relief set forth below, including statutory damages for each of
`
`Defendant’s violations of Section 15(b) ofBIPA.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf ofherself and the proposed Class, respectfully requests
`
`that this Court enter an Order:
`
`a. Certifying the Class as defined above, appointing Plaintiff as class representative
`
`and the undersigned as class counsel;
`
`b. Declaring that Defendant’s actions, as set forth herein, violate Sections 15(a) and
`
`15(b) of BIPA;
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:8
`Case: 1:19-cv-07569 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 11/15/19 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`c. Awarding injunctive and equitable relief as necessary to protect the interests of
`
`Plaintiff and the Class by requiring Defendant to comply with BIPA;
`
`d. Awarding statutory damages of $5,000 for each willful and/or reckless violation of
`
`BIPA, pursuant to 740 ILCS l4/20(2);
`
`e. Awarding statutory damages of $1,000 for each negligent violation of BIPA,
`
`pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/200);
`
`f. Awarding reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and other litigation expenses pursuant
`
`to 740 ILCS 14/20(3);
`
`g. Awarding pre— and post-judgment interest, as allowable by law; and
`
`h. Awarding such further and other relief as the Court deems just and'equitable.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Plaintiff requests trial by jury of all claims that can be so tried.
`
`Dated: October 8, 2019
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`ASIA HRYNIEWICKI, individually and on
`behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Jad Sheikali
`One QfPlafmiff's Attorneys
`
`Jad Sheikali (ARDC #6324641)
`Andrew T. Heldut (ARDC #6331542)
`MCGUIRE LAW, RC.
`55 W. Wacker Drive, 9th Fl.
`
`Chicago, IL 60601
`Tel: (312) 893—7002
`jsheikali@mcgpc.com
`aheldut@mcgpc.com
`
`Attorneys fer Plainttffand the Putative Class
`
`10
`
`